A TRADE expert said rising food costs meant it was ‘unsurprising’ that many children were suffering from malnutrition.

The comments from insolvency trade body R3 came after a Lancashire Telegraph investigation revealed that Blackburn with Darwen has the highest percentage of underweight primary school children in England.

The findings of our investigation came as R3 published a report showing millions of people in the North West struggled to make it through to pay day as a result of rising food prices.

The group’s latest Personal Debt Snapshot found that 43 per cent of adults in the region said they ‘often or sometimes struggle to make it to payday’, with more than half of them citing the rising cost of food as a problem.

Richard Wolff, North West chair of R3, said: “The price of food is the main reason why people struggle from one payday to the next.

“Inflation may be falling, but the cost of living is still too high for people on low incomes. Prices have been rising almost continually since the start of the financial crisis and although the gap is narrowing, wages still haven’t caught up.

“Prices have been rising almost continually since the start of the financial crisis and although the gap is narrowing, wages still haven’t caught up. With families facing these financial pressures, it’s not surprising that children are not getting the nutrition they need.”

“The latest fall in inflation is largely due to a drop in transport prices, which is welcome, but the price of food and household gas and electricity bills remains a bigger problem for many people.”

Data from the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC), which looked at the Body Mass Index (BMI) of Year 6 children, showed 3.5 per cent were clinically underweight in Blackburn with Darwen in 2012/13, which equated to 66 pupils. Assuming the figures are similar for other years, there are about 400 children in the borough at risk of malnutrition.

Health experts at Blackburn with Darwen Council are looking at the issue to ‘understand the full range of causes’.

Comments (18)

It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...happycyclist

Although it may be true in some cases,i bet its not all! Fags,beer,internet,s
ky tv or virgin tv,gambling,cars, all may play a part in kids going without. So wots more important? Luxuries or food?

Although it may be true in some cases,i bet its not all! Fags,beer,internet,s
ky tv or virgin tv,gambling,cars, all may play a part in kids going without. So wots more important? Luxuries or food?DoggydogNo1

happycyclist wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.

[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...[/p][/quote]You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.M.DANNY

happycyclist wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.

I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard "we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.

[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...[/p][/quote]You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.[/p][/quote]I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard "we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.Malthus

happycyclist wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.

I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard &quot;we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.

It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.

[quote][p][bold]Malthus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...[/p][/quote]You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.[/p][/quote]I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard "we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.[/p][/quote]It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.M.DANNY

happycyclist wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.

I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard &quot;we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.

It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.

You really don't have much of a life? One life live it!

[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Malthus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...[/p][/quote]You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.[/p][/quote]I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard "we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.[/p][/quote]It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.[/p][/quote]You really don't have much of a life? One life live it!ikap22

happycyclist wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...

You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.

I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard &quot;we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.

It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.

Got children M Danny?

[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Malthus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]M.DANNY[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote:
It's not the price of food that's the problem; it's the price of everything else. Unfortunately the bailiffs are going to come knocking on your door if you don't pay for everything else, so it's food that takes the hit.
Gas, electricity, water, rent, council tax, telephone/broadband, dentists, prescriptions...[/p][/quote]You can forgo telephone, satellite tvs fags beer mobile apple iphones and any prudent people will keep up with rents council tax,electricity and gas bills and feed the kids.
It's all getting your priorities right in your weekly spending.
Low income or people on generous government benefits those want luxuries like cars satellite tvs fags and beer Apple iphones and designer clothes then cry poverty.
My parent survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s and we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts.[/p][/quote]I would imagine that £5.00 per week in the fifties was quite a considerable amount of money back then. With regard the comments that relate to subscription TV, cigarettes and alcohol, I do not dispute that there are some people who take advantage. However, how many people are claiming benefits who are working. Most of the people who have families who I work with are forced to claim benefits to top up their wages via child and tax benefits. Perhaps if the employers were to pay a decent wage then the benefit bill would drop. Instead hard working people are still having to be subsidised because employers are allowed to pay so little that the state has then got to intervene in order to allow the working poor make ends meet. With regard "we got by with food and clothing but we never begged from the food banks or state handouts" I am sure your parent's received child benefit, I suspect they never sent it back.[/p][/quote]It's the case of I want that t because my friends and neighbours have.
I want a new car because my neighbour has a new car , want designer clothes because all my mates wear designer clothes , I want satellite tv, Apple iphone and buy beer and fags cause all my friends and neighbours enjoys all the luxuries.
Anybody earns £25,000 salary qualify for child benefits tax credits and child tax credits.
Skill people and professional people gets higher salaries unskilled and manual workers are on low incomes that was the case for over 100 years.
People should get the priorities right, do they want fags beer, designer clothes, apple iphones new cars or pay rent electricity gas water and feed the kids.
Is our generous Government benefit is not enough for some folks ? while there are thousands of Eastern Europeans and Asians coming here for better life.
My family survived on £5 a week in the 1950s and 1960s we didn't buy fags beer designer clothes satellite tvs washing machines and we did not have telephone or a car.
Today I still get by with a small income I don't have a satellite tv, car and don't drink beer or smoke fags.I still pay my rent water electricity,council tax and buy my food and never turn to foodbank for help.[/p][/quote]Got children M Danny?sen c b l

I doubt that there'll be much let-up in the rising price of food, at least in the short-term. A couple of weeks ago Abdolreza Abbassian at the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation said: "Everything we have for breakfast is up."

Coffee was up 70% due to unseasonably dry weather in Brazil, pork prices have sored due to a virus epidemic in the US, wheat prices have been affected by extreme cold weather in the US and the political crisis in the Ukraine, while dairy prices are being bolstered by high demand in emerging markets.

Self-evidently some of these factors are temporary in nature, and in due course supply well adjust but the situation is ugly, to say the very least.

While nationally the MSM is hailing the narrowing of the gap between rising prices and wages I suspect that any improvement in earnings will not be spread widely, and in any case after tax-wages account for just over half of household's disposable income. Other components of household income, such as welfare payments, are being squeezed extremely hard.

Moreover workers would need an exceedingly prolonged period of consistent wage rises above the rate of price inflation to repair the damage done over the last half-decade. I think that this is pretty unlikely, to be quite honest.

I'm absolutely convinced that the purchasing power of the Pound will continue to decline at a fair clip against a basket of essential items. The experience of putting less in a shopping basket and paying more for doing so is simply not registering in the Westminster Bubble.

I doubt that there'll be much let-up in the rising price of food, at least in the short-term. A couple of weeks ago Abdolreza Abbassian at the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation said: "Everything we have for breakfast is up."
Coffee was up 70% due to unseasonably dry weather in Brazil, pork prices have sored due to a virus epidemic in the US, wheat prices have been affected by extreme cold weather in the US and the political crisis in the Ukraine, while dairy prices are being bolstered by high demand in emerging markets.
Self-evidently some of these factors are temporary in nature, and in due course supply well adjust but the situation is ugly, to say the very least.
While nationally the MSM is hailing the narrowing of the gap between rising prices and wages I suspect that any improvement in earnings will not be spread widely, and in any case after tax-wages account for just over half of household's disposable income. Other components of household income, such as welfare payments, are being squeezed extremely hard.
Moreover workers would need an exceedingly prolonged period of consistent wage rises above the rate of price inflation to repair the damage done over the last half-decade. I think that this is pretty unlikely, to be quite honest.
I'm absolutely convinced that the purchasing power of the Pound will continue to decline at a fair clip against a basket of essential items. The experience of putting less in a shopping basket and paying more for doing so is simply not registering in the Westminster Bubble.Kevin, Colne

Kevin has pretty much nailed it in his assessment but I'd go further by stating the cost of petrol over the last 5 years has risen by 50p per litre, most so on diesel, which was traditionally cheaper but is now more expensive. This cost forms part of the costs of getting goods to supermarkets and therefore forms part of the shopping bill.
Electricity has doubled, Gas by 150%, with Water bucking this trend, by rising only 25% in the last 10 years. However, the same cannot be said of the Governments safety net of the Minimum Wage, which has never kept up with inflation however you measure it, on Consumer Price Index or Retail Price Index. So those will be the Millions of workers who suffer during this time. The proposal to increase this rate to £7 per hour stills falls short of where it should be in real terms.
As fewer and fewer have that disposable portion of an income to save towards owning their own homes, the pressure is going to be on to build more social housing or see people being forced to live in sub-standard, privately rented accommodations, with the Government, through the housing benefits scheme, having to pick up the bill for Rackman-like slum landlords.
We face the future spectre of childhood Rickets in this country, not seen since my parents lifetimes and once thought to be eradicated forever. And this prospect will hit the most honest, prudent and hard-working families in this region, to the amazement of the many.
It is a simple case of basic Math, where the buying power of your wage, is being slowly eroded, as prices rise and wages fail to keep up with them. And there's not a damned thing that anyone can do, as the Treasury needs the Income Taxes to pay off the Government debt, the National Insurance payments to partially fund our crumbling NHS, and fuel prices being dictated by foreign owned companies. We are truly 'in it', nigh on up to our necks.

Kevin has pretty much nailed it in his assessment but I'd go further by stating the cost of petrol over the last 5 years has risen by 50p per litre, most so on diesel, which was traditionally cheaper but is now more expensive. This cost forms part of the costs of getting goods to supermarkets and therefore forms part of the shopping bill.
Electricity has doubled, Gas by 150%, with Water bucking this trend, by rising only 25% in the last 10 years. However, the same cannot be said of the Governments safety net of the Minimum Wage, which has never kept up with inflation however you measure it, on Consumer Price Index or Retail Price Index. So those will be the Millions of workers who suffer during this time. The proposal to increase this rate to £7 per hour stills falls short of where it should be in real terms.
As fewer and fewer have that disposable portion of an income to save towards owning their own homes, the pressure is going to be on to build more social housing or see people being forced to live in sub-standard, privately rented accommodations, with the Government, through the housing benefits scheme, having to pick up the bill for Rackman-like slum landlords.
We face the future spectre of childhood Rickets in this country, not seen since my parents lifetimes and once thought to be eradicated forever. And this prospect will hit the most honest, prudent and hard-working families in this region, to the amazement of the many.
It is a simple case of basic Math, where the buying power of your wage, is being slowly eroded, as prices rise and wages fail to keep up with them. And there's not a damned thing that anyone can do, as the Treasury needs the Income Taxes to pay off the Government debt, the National Insurance payments to partially fund our crumbling NHS, and fuel prices being dictated by foreign owned companies. We are truly 'in it', nigh on up to our necks.Cimbri

Cimbri wrote:
Kevin has pretty much nailed it in his assessment but I'd go further by stating the cost of petrol over the last 5 years has risen by 50p per litre, most so on diesel, which was traditionally cheaper but is now more expensive. This cost forms part of the costs of getting goods to supermarkets and therefore forms part of the shopping bill.
Electricity has doubled, Gas by 150%, with Water bucking this trend, by rising only 25% in the last 10 years. However, the same cannot be said of the Governments safety net of the Minimum Wage, which has never kept up with inflation however you measure it, on Consumer Price Index or Retail Price Index. So those will be the Millions of workers who suffer during this time. The proposal to increase this rate to £7 per hour stills falls short of where it should be in real terms.
As fewer and fewer have that disposable portion of an income to save towards owning their own homes, the pressure is going to be on to build more social housing or see people being forced to live in sub-standard, privately rented accommodations, with the Government, through the housing benefits scheme, having to pick up the bill for Rackman-like slum landlords.
We face the future spectre of childhood Rickets in this country, not seen since my parents lifetimes and once thought to be eradicated forever. And this prospect will hit the most honest, prudent and hard-working families in this region, to the amazement of the many.
It is a simple case of basic Math, where the buying power of your wage, is being slowly eroded, as prices rise and wages fail to keep up with them. And there's not a damned thing that anyone can do, as the Treasury needs the Income Taxes to pay off the Government debt, the National Insurance payments to partially fund our crumbling NHS, and fuel prices being dictated by foreign owned companies. We are truly 'in it', nigh on up to our necks.

Cimbri, your point about the price of oil is well made. There is a view, set-out by among others Dr Tim Morgan in his book 'Life After Growth', that our economic system is primarily a function of surplus energy. Dr Morgan argues that since more and more energy is being absorbed in the process of extracting energy this is resulting in an ever-diminishing energy surplus, hence the economic growth that we have enjoyed for the best part of two centuries is drawing to a close.

Unfortunately we've created a financial economy of money and debt that is continuing to expand with ever greater claims on the future output of the real economy . Dr Morgan asserts that the two can be reconciled only through the destruction of financial claims - money and debt - on a 'truly enormous scale'.

This may be an overly-pessimistic view, but regardless of this point the fact remains that 10 years ago the salary of an average earner in Britain would have been able to buy 1076 barrels of oil; but would buy just 328 barrels today. This is a huge drop in purchasing power. Given that oil is central to so many essentials and much economic activity it's hardly surprising that goods and services are costing a great deal more.

As you say we are truly 'in it'. The news story above and the points you make in your post are manifestations of this unfolding drama.

[quote][p][bold]Cimbri[/bold] wrote:
Kevin has pretty much nailed it in his assessment but I'd go further by stating the cost of petrol over the last 5 years has risen by 50p per litre, most so on diesel, which was traditionally cheaper but is now more expensive. This cost forms part of the costs of getting goods to supermarkets and therefore forms part of the shopping bill.
Electricity has doubled, Gas by 150%, with Water bucking this trend, by rising only 25% in the last 10 years. However, the same cannot be said of the Governments safety net of the Minimum Wage, which has never kept up with inflation however you measure it, on Consumer Price Index or Retail Price Index. So those will be the Millions of workers who suffer during this time. The proposal to increase this rate to £7 per hour stills falls short of where it should be in real terms.
As fewer and fewer have that disposable portion of an income to save towards owning their own homes, the pressure is going to be on to build more social housing or see people being forced to live in sub-standard, privately rented accommodations, with the Government, through the housing benefits scheme, having to pick up the bill for Rackman-like slum landlords.
We face the future spectre of childhood Rickets in this country, not seen since my parents lifetimes and once thought to be eradicated forever. And this prospect will hit the most honest, prudent and hard-working families in this region, to the amazement of the many.
It is a simple case of basic Math, where the buying power of your wage, is being slowly eroded, as prices rise and wages fail to keep up with them. And there's not a damned thing that anyone can do, as the Treasury needs the Income Taxes to pay off the Government debt, the National Insurance payments to partially fund our crumbling NHS, and fuel prices being dictated by foreign owned companies. We are truly 'in it', nigh on up to our necks.[/p][/quote]Cimbri, your point about the price of oil is well made. There is a view, set-out by among others Dr Tim Morgan in his book 'Life After Growth', that our economic system is primarily a function of surplus energy. Dr Morgan argues that since more and more energy is being absorbed in the process of extracting energy this is resulting in an ever-diminishing energy surplus, hence the economic growth that we have enjoyed for the best part of two centuries is drawing to a close.
Unfortunately we've created a financial economy of money and debt that is continuing to expand with ever greater claims on the future output of the real economy . Dr Morgan asserts that the two can be reconciled only through the destruction of financial claims - money and debt - on a 'truly enormous scale'.
This may be an overly-pessimistic view, but regardless of this point the fact remains that 10 years ago the salary of an average earner in Britain would have been able to buy 1076 barrels of oil; but would buy just 328 barrels today. This is a huge drop in purchasing power. Given that oil is central to so many essentials and much economic activity it's hardly surprising that goods and services are costing a great deal more.
As you say we are truly 'in it'. The news story above and the points you make in your post are manifestations of this unfolding drama.Kevin, Colne

Kevin,
Do you subscribe to the theory that there will be another deep economic downturn, sometime this year - I'm hearing, around August?
This will be because, more than the usual suspects are expected to default, or come close it, on their countries debt repayments and thus causing havoc in the money markets, again?

One thing that I failed to mention earlier, was that, in a few years time, those whom have taken advantage of the low interest rates, and the Governments high percentage loan to deposit scheme, are going to fall foul of a jump in interest rates, due to the monetary crisis, that will see their repayments go just beyond their ability to pay, with the consequence that, those houses will be dumped on the market, as the mortgage companies try to recover their losses. This, in turn, will **** the current bubble in house prices, causing that market, to go into a period of freefall.
Once again, there has been much financial jiggery-pokery, in the selling of these financial packages, very reminiscent of that which took place in the US of A, leading to the sub-prime crisis, where people whom should never have gained a mortgage, are being positively encouraged to do so, by salesmen whose only worry is, in making that bonus sales mark, and not the consequences of their actions. Mis-sold mortgages abound, nowadays.
Personally, I'm confident of another round of sovereign debt problems, due to the continued lack of transparency, not to mention the inability to gain proper oversight boards, to enforce the current regulations. When you consider that, some were able to manipulate LIBOR - one of the stabilisers of Credit Default Swaps, it's little wonder that I have no confidence in the market to govern itself, nor prevent the abuses in the spread in CDS, along with other derivatives, and their huge expansion of late. They simply cannot be trusted, either in the Government or regulatory bodies, to ensure that trading in the market, is fair or equitable, as the recent Post Office sell-off debacle has shown, with the Treasury losing some £2Billion to shady practises. Where Landsdowne Partners, who were involved in the deal, with committee member, Peter Davies, who really should have declared an interest, as he was George Osbournes, best man, would you believe? Too cosy for comfort, I think.

Kevin,
Do you subscribe to the theory that there will be another deep economic downturn, sometime this year - I'm hearing, around August?
This will be because, more than the usual suspects are expected to default, or come close it, on their countries debt repayments and thus causing havoc in the money markets, again?
One thing that I failed to mention earlier, was that, in a few years time, those whom have taken advantage of the low interest rates, and the Governments high percentage loan to deposit scheme, are going to fall foul of a jump in interest rates, due to the monetary crisis, that will see their repayments go just beyond their ability to pay, with the consequence that, those houses will be dumped on the market, as the mortgage companies try to recover their losses. This, in turn, will **** the current bubble in house prices, causing that market, to go into a period of freefall.
Once again, there has been much financial jiggery-pokery, in the selling of these financial packages, very reminiscent of that which took place in the US of A, leading to the sub-prime crisis, where people whom should never have gained a mortgage, are being positively encouraged to do so, by salesmen whose only worry is, in making that bonus sales mark, and not the consequences of their actions. Mis-sold mortgages abound, nowadays.
Personally, I'm confident of another round of sovereign debt problems, due to the continued lack of transparency, not to mention the inability to gain proper oversight boards, to enforce the current regulations. When you consider that, some were able to manipulate LIBOR - one of the stabilisers of Credit Default Swaps, it's little wonder that I have no confidence in the market to govern itself, nor prevent the abuses in the spread in CDS, along with other derivatives, and their huge expansion of late. They simply cannot be trusted, either in the Government or regulatory bodies, to ensure that trading in the market, is fair or equitable, as the recent Post Office sell-off debacle has shown, with the Treasury losing some £2Billion to shady practises. Where Landsdowne Partners, who were involved in the deal, with committee member, Peter Davies, who really should have declared an interest, as he was George Osbournes, best man, would you believe? Too cosy for comfort, I think.Cimbri

People want to live beyond their mean with mobile phone Apple iphones internet sky satellite tv, new cars, designer clothes and then cry poverty.
Unskilled and manual workers are on minimum wage and people on Government benefits do receive generous benefits with rents and council tax paid and child benefits.
If people of Eastern Europe and Asia wants to come to UK for better life then UK must be one of best country in the world looking after our poor people with state welfare benefits, free schools free health care (NHS), free dental free medicines free eye glasses child benefits rent and council tax rebates for the poor and on low incomes child tax and working tax .
credits.
People here say we are poor and on breadline and turning to foodbanks for free food when they turn up in cars with designer clothes iphones fags and beer cans and cry poverty.
Like I told you don't live beyond your mean if you cannot afford designer clothes then buy them from Primark and you can go without cars, Apple iphones ,sky tvs telephones internet fags and beer.Feed your kids pay your rents electricity gas water and buy your food.
Some folks have both partners working so can enjoy a bit of luxury like cars holidays apple iphones sky tvs internet etc etc to live comfortably.
Some folks have too many kids, living off state benefits then expect state to pay for everything large houses, state benefits child benefits cars, sky tvs mobile phones sky tvs internets etc etc.
Government benefit was invented for folks who are unable to work and not to abuse our welfare system.

People want to live beyond their mean with mobile phone Apple iphones internet sky satellite tv, new cars, designer clothes and then cry poverty.
Unskilled and manual workers are on minimum wage and people on Government benefits do receive generous benefits with rents and council tax paid and child benefits.
If people of Eastern Europe and Asia wants to come to UK for better life then UK must be one of best country in the world looking after our poor people with state welfare benefits, free schools free health care (NHS), free dental free medicines free eye glasses child benefits rent and council tax rebates for the poor and on low incomes child tax and working tax .
credits.
People here say we are poor and on breadline and turning to foodbanks for free food when they turn up in cars with designer clothes iphones fags and beer cans and cry poverty.
Like I told you don't live beyond your mean if you cannot afford designer clothes then buy them from Primark and you can go without cars, Apple iphones ,sky tvs telephones internet fags and beer.Feed your kids pay your rents electricity gas water and buy your food.
Some folks have both partners working so can enjoy a bit of luxury like cars holidays apple iphones sky tvs internet etc etc to live comfortably.
Some folks have too many kids, living off state benefits then expect state to pay for everything large houses, state benefits child benefits cars, sky tvs mobile phones sky tvs internets etc etc.
Government benefit was invented for folks who are unable to work and not to abuse our welfare system.M.DANNY

I have to be honest, and I hope that this does not sound flippant, but I really have no idea whether there will be an economic downturn sometime this year. For what it’s worth I think there are some potentially pretty serious geo-political tensions around the globe and any one of these could turn into something really, really nasty. It wouldn’t take much of a policy error for things to go seriously awry. On the other hand there could be a black swan out there not even on the radar that will create havoc. As you say there may well be a sovereign crisis – a ‘hard default’ – as opposed to the current regimen of engineered ‘soft defaults’.

In my view the aim of the government ‘Help to Buy’ scheme has been to maintain house prices at elevated levels in order to protect the value of the collateral of the lenders. One other principal beneficiary of this has been house-builders who have been able to expand their margins substantially.

I think one can paint a number of scenarios about future rises in interest rates. In the ‘best case’ scenario any rise in rates is exceedingly slow and the rise gradual and while all or most mortgages granted recently feature high LTV they have been issued to people with adequate income servicing capacity and a ‘margin of safety’ – the mortgagee at the time of taking the mortgage has more than sufficient spare income to service an increase in debt charges. It may well be the case that the bulk of new borrowers have opted for some degree of certainty by taking fixed rather than floating-rate mortgages, and thus they have some immunity against any increase in interest rates. In the ‘worst case’ scenario there is a black swan event that causes a very swift and very large rise in interest rates that over-whelms borrowers, including H. M. Government. If this comes to pass then we’ll be in even deeper trouble than we are now.

One thing that strikes me as being very different today, however, is that whereas in the past inflation eroded the carrying burden of debt it was the case also that incomes were either maintained or increased in real terms - it is my view that this latter feature no longer applies or has been weakened considerably. In the past wage inflation assisted a borrower from running aground but this is no longer helping in the same way. In fact quite the reverse: while price inflation helps erode the debt the carrying burden might not ease as quickly, if at all, as wages continue to fall in real terms against rising prices of essentials.

To be honest I have to confess that I would be very surprised to see ‘houses dumped on the market’. I think that the financial crisis of 2007 heralded a new era when government and lenders forged a new policy of forbearance in order to avoid foreclosures. This strikes me as a precedent for the future. Of course, ZIRP helped enormously and this will not be available next time, but the principal beneficiaries of ZIRP have been those on base-rate tracker mortgages rather than standard variable rates. In many ways the ‘house price crash’ that we’ve been through has been well camouflaged as the aggregate figures have been distorted by the market in London and the price declines elsewhere for the most part have been in real terms rather than nominal terms. This is not to say that there have been no geographical markets or property types that have experienced falls in nominal prices, but overall nominal prices have either held-up pretty well or recovered to match or move close to the peak level.

As you say it would be very surprising not to see renewed crises of sovereigns and I wholeheartedly agree that the behaviour of market agents in manipulating key matrices has been truly shocking.

The part-privatisation of the GPO has been little short of reckless. Leaving aside the arguments about privatisation, if one was struggling to establish a likely market value for selling shares in the company then surely the proper and prudent approach would have been to dispose of a small part of the business in the first instance, perhaps 10%-30%, in order to establish market value. Now, it’s true that this may still result in under-valuation because H. M. Government would remain the majority shareholder but quite frankly the selling of national assets below their true worth must surely rank as a gross policy error for which the minister responsible should resign.

I am sorry for my lengthy response, which on re-reading sounds as though I’m ‘sitting on the fence’. This is quite a good place to be because one does at least get a good view! I think what I’m really trying to say is that your guess is as good as mine, and more likely it is probably better!

Cimbri, hi!
I have to be honest, and I hope that this does not sound flippant, but I really have no idea whether there will be an economic downturn sometime this year. For what it’s worth I think there are some potentially pretty serious geo-political tensions around the globe and any one of these could turn into something really, really nasty. It wouldn’t take much of a policy error for things to go seriously awry. On the other hand there could be a black swan out there not even on the radar that will create havoc. As you say there may well be a sovereign crisis – a ‘hard default’ – as opposed to the current regimen of engineered ‘soft defaults’.
In my view the aim of the government ‘Help to Buy’ scheme has been to maintain house prices at elevated levels in order to protect the value of the collateral of the lenders. One other principal beneficiary of this has been house-builders who have been able to expand their margins substantially.
I think one can paint a number of scenarios about future rises in interest rates. In the ‘best case’ scenario any rise in rates is exceedingly slow and the rise gradual and while all or most mortgages granted recently feature high LTV they have been issued to people with adequate income servicing capacity and a ‘margin of safety’ – the mortgagee at the time of taking the mortgage has more than sufficient spare income to service an increase in debt charges. It may well be the case that the bulk of new borrowers have opted for some degree of certainty by taking fixed rather than floating-rate mortgages, and thus they have some immunity against any increase in interest rates. In the ‘worst case’ scenario there is a black swan event that causes a very swift and very large rise in interest rates that over-whelms borrowers, including H. M. Government. If this comes to pass then we’ll be in even deeper trouble than we are now.
One thing that strikes me as being very different today, however, is that whereas in the past inflation eroded the carrying burden of debt it was the case also that incomes were either maintained or increased in real terms - it is my view that this latter feature no longer applies or has been weakened considerably. In the past wage inflation assisted a borrower from running aground but this is no longer helping in the same way. In fact quite the reverse: while price inflation helps erode the debt the carrying burden might not ease as quickly, if at all, as wages continue to fall in real terms against rising prices of essentials.
To be honest I have to confess that I would be very surprised to see ‘houses dumped on the market’. I think that the financial crisis of 2007 heralded a new era when government and lenders forged a new policy of forbearance in order to avoid foreclosures. This strikes me as a precedent for the future. Of course, ZIRP helped enormously and this will not be available next time, but the principal beneficiaries of ZIRP have been those on base-rate tracker mortgages rather than standard variable rates. In many ways the ‘house price crash’ that we’ve been through has been well camouflaged as the aggregate figures have been distorted by the market in London and the price declines elsewhere for the most part have been in real terms rather than nominal terms. This is not to say that there have been no geographical markets or property types that have experienced falls in nominal prices, but overall nominal prices have either held-up pretty well or recovered to match or move close to the peak level.
As you say it would be very surprising not to see renewed crises of sovereigns and I wholeheartedly agree that the behaviour of market agents in manipulating key matrices has been truly shocking.
The part-privatisation of the GPO has been little short of reckless. Leaving aside the arguments about privatisation, if one was struggling to establish a likely market value for selling shares in the company then surely the proper and prudent approach would have been to dispose of a small part of the business in the first instance, perhaps 10%-30%, in order to establish market value. Now, it’s true that this may still result in under-valuation because H. M. Government would remain the majority shareholder but quite frankly the selling of national assets below their true worth must surely rank as a gross policy error for which the minister responsible should resign.
I am sorry for my lengthy response, which on re-reading sounds as though I’m ‘sitting on the fence’. This is quite a good place to be because one does at least get a good view! I think what I’m really trying to say is that your guess is as good as mine, and more likely it is probably better!Kevin, Colne

Kevin, to paraphrase, "the system which seemed to serve us well is broke". Can I add that it is being exposed for what it is ie one which runs for the profit of the few.

Democracy is out of the window and the sooner we move to a system which puts people before profits then the sooner we'll all be better off and shocking stories of malnutrition and the like will, once again, be confined to the history books.

Kevin, to paraphrase, "the system which seemed to serve us well is broke". Can I add that it is being exposed for what it is ie one which runs for the profit of the few.
Democracy is out of the window and the sooner we move to a system which puts people before profits then the sooner we'll all be better off and shocking stories of malnutrition and the like will, once again, be confined to the history books.Timefor

A friend of mine, who is unemployed for some time, has been forced to move to smaller accommodations, in order to save money. This new place is unfurnished and so I thought I'd help out, by buying him some lounge furniture that he lacked.
When I visited a rather large charity shop on a Darwen St corner of Blackburn, I was really shocked to see the prices marked on items that had been donated to the store, especially when I began to examine the condition of them. Whilst they had obviously seen some better days, no attempt had been made to steam clean them, to make them more presentable, so as to come anywhere near close to the 80% of new price that they were seeking. Not a place that I would commend to anyone.
Instead, take soup and sandwiches to the local auction rooms, to both have an enjoyable day and save a lot of money too. I bought the rather comfy seat that I was sat upon during the auction, for a fiver and it's now, my seat, at his home. Which was a real steal, as it's a Parker Knoll recliner, covered in an Holdsworth moquette, that I have to fight his cat for possession of, when I visit.

A friend of mine, who is unemployed for some time, has been forced to move to smaller accommodations, in order to save money. This new place is unfurnished and so I thought I'd help out, by buying him some lounge furniture that he lacked.
When I visited a rather large charity shop on a Darwen St corner of Blackburn, I was really shocked to see the prices marked on items that had been donated to the store, especially when I began to examine the condition of them. Whilst they had obviously seen some better days, no attempt had been made to steam clean them, to make them more presentable, so as to come anywhere near close to the 80% of new price that they were seeking. Not a place that I would commend to anyone.
Instead, take soup and sandwiches to the local auction rooms, to both have an enjoyable day and save a lot of money too. I bought the rather comfy seat that I was sat upon during the auction, for a fiver and it's now, my seat, at his home. Which was a real steal, as it's a Parker Knoll recliner, covered in an Holdsworth moquette, that I have to fight his cat for possession of, when I visit.Cimbri

Cimbri wrote:
Kevin,
Do you subscribe to the theory that there will be another deep economic downturn, sometime this year - I'm hearing, around August?
This will be because, more than the usual suspects are expected to default, or come close it, on their countries debt repayments and thus causing havoc in the money markets, again?

One thing that I failed to mention earlier, was that, in a few years time, those whom have taken advantage of the low interest rates, and the Governments high percentage loan to deposit scheme, are going to fall foul of a jump in interest rates, due to the monetary crisis, that will see their repayments go just beyond their ability to pay, with the consequence that, those houses will be dumped on the market, as the mortgage companies try to recover their losses. This, in turn, will **** the current bubble in house prices, causing that market, to go into a period of freefall.
Once again, there has been much financial jiggery-pokery, in the selling of these financial packages, very reminiscent of that which took place in the US of A, leading to the sub-prime crisis, where people whom should never have gained a mortgage, are being positively encouraged to do so, by salesmen whose only worry is, in making that bonus sales mark, and not the consequences of their actions. Mis-sold mortgages abound, nowadays.
Personally, I'm confident of another round of sovereign debt problems, due to the continued lack of transparency, not to mention the inability to gain proper oversight boards, to enforce the current regulations. When you consider that, some were able to manipulate LIBOR - one of the stabilisers of Credit Default Swaps, it's little wonder that I have no confidence in the market to govern itself, nor prevent the abuses in the spread in CDS, along with other derivatives, and their huge expansion of late. They simply cannot be trusted, either in the Government or regulatory bodies, to ensure that trading in the market, is fair or equitable, as the recent Post Office sell-off debacle has shown, with the Treasury losing some £2Billion to shady practises. Where Landsdowne Partners, who were involved in the deal, with committee member, Peter Davies, who really should have declared an interest, as he was George Osbournes, best man, would you believe? Too cosy for comfort, I think.

And now to help even more let's stop supermarkets offering 2 for 1 that'll make things much easier for us

Thanks Mr Camarooooon

[quote][p][bold]Cimbri[/bold] wrote:
Kevin,
Do you subscribe to the theory that there will be another deep economic downturn, sometime this year - I'm hearing, around August?
This will be because, more than the usual suspects are expected to default, or come close it, on their countries debt repayments and thus causing havoc in the money markets, again?
One thing that I failed to mention earlier, was that, in a few years time, those whom have taken advantage of the low interest rates, and the Governments high percentage loan to deposit scheme, are going to fall foul of a jump in interest rates, due to the monetary crisis, that will see their repayments go just beyond their ability to pay, with the consequence that, those houses will be dumped on the market, as the mortgage companies try to recover their losses. This, in turn, will **** the current bubble in house prices, causing that market, to go into a period of freefall.
Once again, there has been much financial jiggery-pokery, in the selling of these financial packages, very reminiscent of that which took place in the US of A, leading to the sub-prime crisis, where people whom should never have gained a mortgage, are being positively encouraged to do so, by salesmen whose only worry is, in making that bonus sales mark, and not the consequences of their actions. Mis-sold mortgages abound, nowadays.
Personally, I'm confident of another round of sovereign debt problems, due to the continued lack of transparency, not to mention the inability to gain proper oversight boards, to enforce the current regulations. When you consider that, some were able to manipulate LIBOR - one of the stabilisers of Credit Default Swaps, it's little wonder that I have no confidence in the market to govern itself, nor prevent the abuses in the spread in CDS, along with other derivatives, and their huge expansion of late. They simply cannot be trusted, either in the Government or regulatory bodies, to ensure that trading in the market, is fair or equitable, as the recent Post Office sell-off debacle has shown, with the Treasury losing some £2Billion to shady practises. Where Landsdowne Partners, who were involved in the deal, with committee member, Peter Davies, who really should have declared an interest, as he was George Osbournes, best man, would you believe? Too cosy for comfort, I think.[/p][/quote]And now to help even more let's stop supermarkets offering 2 for 1 that'll make things much easier for us
Thanks Mr CamarooooonConcernedOssy